Level 5 Leadership: Humility, Will, and Good to Great

Level 5 Leadership: Humility Versus Will

Level 5 leadership involves what Collins (2001) calls the "paradoxical blend of humility and will" (p. 13). As a result, Level 5 leaders are "a study in duality," exhibiting binaries such as being both humble and fearless, both modest and willful (Collins, 2001). The complexity of human character makes it possible to hold two seemingly disparate qualities in check at any one time, knowing exactly when, how, and why to draw on one quality — such as humility — versus the other. Collins expands upon the concept of Level 5 leadership in the opening sections of Good to Great because Level 5 leadership is central to effectively motivating others and promoting the values of an organization.

Both humility and will are difficult qualities to perfect, and all leaders possess each to a greater or lesser degree. Even the most apparently arrogant leaders have moments when they are willing to surrender their egos and let others shine. If they lacked humility entirely, their leadership would be less effective and certainly not at Level 5. Conversely, other leaders may appear more driven and ambitious than they actually are. Will is a long-term proposition: starting a project and not seeing it through, or buckling under pressure, are signs of insufficient will that must be balanced by determination and perseverance.

Of the two central qualities of Level 5 leadership, humility would seem the harder to develop or cultivate. This may be especially true of younger, non-white, or female leaders who must "constantly prove their competence to followers" ("Humility Key to Effective Leadership," 2011). Interestingly, female leaders may find it easier to cultivate humility yet more difficult to attract followers who appreciate it as a leadership trait. Collins's work suggests that Level 5 leaders often go unrecognized because their innate humility does not match the stereotype of the authoritarian, arrogant leader who claims all the credit and accepts none of the personal responsibility.

Leaders also face the constant temptation to abuse their position of power — a phenomenon rooted in underdeveloped humility. They live continually with the threat of failure and loss of pride. Humility exposes vulnerability, which can be misconstrued as weakness. Ironically, it takes a high degree of will to overcome the self-doubt and defeatism that come with leadership. Having the will to succeed means moving through failure and countering obstacles with ever-greater demonstrations of strength and purpose. In addition to humility and will, a Level 5 leader demonstrates unwavering resolve and determination, as well as "inspired standards" (Collins, 2001, p. 31). These qualities of resolve, determination, and inspired standards tie directly into the need for perfected will and perfected humility.

Level 5 leaders are ambitious enough to focus firmly on organizational goals and do whatever it takes to achieve them. Crucially, however, the Level 5 leader's ambition is not directed toward personal gain — and herein lies the power of humility. Humility becomes the foundation upon which Level 5 leaders build their capabilities and their teams. It is harder to achieve a position of leadership without first developing the humility required when working with others. The will needed to address crisis, challenge, and change is therefore much harder to develop over the long run. Humility tends to come with the territory, as all crises shed light on weaknesses inherent in the organization or in the leadership itself.

Research confirms that humility is a core leadership trait. "Leader humility is associated with more learning-oriented teams, more engaged employees and lower voluntary employee turnover" ("Humility Key to Effective Leadership," 2011). Honing humility requires will: the will to learn and grow, and the will to achieve organizational goals as a team rather than as an individual seeking the spotlight. Even the most charismatic leaders — such as Richard Branson — understand on some level what humility is and how to cultivate it. Humility is difficult to cultivate because it requires a skillful balance between having a strong personality and ego, on one hand, and the ability to learn, grow, and accept responsibility for mistakes, on the other. As Collins (2001) explains, "the great irony…is that the animus and personal ambition that often drive people to positions of power stand at odds with the humility required for Level 5 leadership" (p. 36).

Getting the Right People on the Bus: Beyond Compensation

Using an extended metaphor of a bus, Collins (2001) argues that it is more important to "first get the right people on the bus (and the wrong people off the bus) before you figure out where to drive it" (p. 44). Getting the right people on board allows the leader and the entire organization to "more easily adapt to a changing world" (Collins, 2001, p. 42). After getting the right people on the bus, the organization needs strategic means of keeping them there.

Research suggests that compensation alone is not the most effective method of managerial retention. Collins (2001) states there is "no systematic pattern linking specific forms of executive compensation to the process of going from good to great" (p. 10). Corporate performance is not directly linked to compensation because compensation is an extrinsic reward, based on the assumption that great people are primarily motivated extrinsically. Collins's assessment, however, is not fully supported by the broader literature. Van Herpen, Van Praag, and Cools (2005) found a direct and significant relationship between an organization's compensation systems and work satisfaction, motivation, and turnover intent. Sears (2009) similarly found that incentive pay has a high impact on employee retention. It is possible that there were methodological limitations in Collins's (2001) study designs that obscured differences in how compensation strategies affect employee motivation and retention.

At the same time, Collins (2001) acknowledges other significant variables in employee retention that are at least as important as compensation. This falls in line with the "who first" philosophy: just as it is more important to get the right people on the bus before determining where it is going, it is equally important to pay the right people first. "It's not how you compensate your executives, it's which executives you have to compensate in the first place," (Collins, 2001, p. 50). A more effective compensation strategy begins with getting the right people on board and then recognizing that those people are motivated by far more than money. "The right people will do the right things and deliver the best results they're capable of, regardless of the incentive system" (Collins, 2001, p. 50). Compensation matters not so much for shaping specific behaviors as for retaining the right people and building their loyalty to the company.

Character attributes are therefore among the key criteria for determining who belongs on the bus. Excessive or indiscriminate layoffs can be disastrous for organizations that fail to recognize the value of their employees. Companies that constantly cycle through talented employees are not good-to-great companies. Organizations that identify who the right people are and know how to motivate and retain them are the ones that make the leap from good to great. Compensation can and should be a component of keeping the right people satisfied. If, as Sears (2009) found, incentive pay and commissions help motivate employees, leaders may need to take that into account. However, leaders would do better still to recruit employees who do not require incentive pay in order to feel like valued members of the team.

Good-to-great companies develop sound incentive strategies that suit their specific organizational context and then adhere to those strategies consistently. Compensation becomes less critical once the right people are already on the bus and the organization is moving in the right direction. Intrinsic motivation needs to take precedence over extrinsic motivation. Long-tenured executives who have demonstrated loyalty and genuine investment in the company are often ideal team members. By contrast, high-profile external executives brought on temporarily for a large payout are driven by the extrinsic rewards of their short-term role. They may help the company achieve some short-term goals — such as crisis management — but a good-to-great company does not allow such individuals to occupy seats that should be reserved for loyal, intrinsically motivated employees. As Collins (2001) puts it, the celebrity executive rides outside the bus, much like a passenger who only needs to travel a few blocks.

It is also important to consider the full range of compensation options available. The right types depend on who is on board and what might best sustain their motivation. Compensation extends well beyond salary. Ancillary benefits such as flexible working conditions, opportunities for promotion, the ability to work remotely, and greater levels of responsibility can outweigh monetary compensation in importance. Increased access to information, greater empowerment, and an improved working environment are all means by which leaders can develop and retain a team of talented, motivated employees.

Conclusion

Both will and humility are difficult to cultivate, especially in tandem. And yet it takes great personal will to cultivate humility — and a great sense of humility to summon the will to push through difficult situations and difficult people. There is a reason Collins (2001) focuses so intently on these two seemingly contradictory traits rather than other character binaries: effective leadership demands the personal maturity to recognize the difference between strength of character and arrogance. The same clarity of self-knowledge underlies the hedgehog concept, the philosophy of getting the right people on the bus, and the equanimous approach to technology. Each of these principles reflects Collins's central argument that going from good to great requires not complexity or charisma, but disciplined, humble, and purposeful focus.